alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2021228EN.01000301.xml

| 14.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 228/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 228/3

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 22 April 2021 — Council of the European Union v Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), European Commission, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

(Case C-46/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - Common Foreign and Security Policy - Combating terrorism - Restrictive measures taken against certain persons and entities - Freezing of funds - Common Position 2001/931/CFSP - Article 1(3), (4) and (6) - Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 - Article 2(3) - Retention of an organisation on the list of persons, groups and entities involved in terrorist acts - Conditions - Decision by a competent authority - Ongoing risk of involvement in terrorist activities - Factual basis of the decisions to freeze funds - Decision to review the national decision on which the initial inclusion was based - Obligation to state reasons)

(2021/C 228/03)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Council of the European Union (represented by: B. Driessen and S. Van Overmeire, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings: Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) (represented by: A.M. van Eik and T.M.D. Buruma, advocaten), European Commission (represented by: R. Tricot, T. Ramopoulos and J. Norris, acting as Agents), and United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented: initially by S. Brandon, acting as Agent, and by P. Nevill, Barrister, and subsequently by F. Shibli and S. McCrory, acting as Agents, and by P. Nevill, Barrister)

Interveners in support of the appellant: French Republic (represented by: A.L. Desjonquères, B. Fodda and J.-L. Carré, acting as Agents) and Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: M.K. Bulterman and J. Langer, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Sets aside points 1 to 11, 13 and 14 of the operative part of the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 15 November 2018, PKK v Council (T-316/14, EU:T:2018:788); |
| --- | --- |

1.

Sets aside points 1 to 11, 13 and 14 of the operative part of the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 15 November 2018, PKK v Council (T-316/14, EU:T:2018:788);

| 2. | Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Refers the case back to the General Court of the European Union;

| 3. | Reserves the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Reserves the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 103, 18.3.2019.

---
20288

#### State v. Fotu

Affirmed
# Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas

February 1, 2018

No. 04

- 17

- 00775

- CR

Silas WIRTH, Appella nt

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017CR9447 Honorable Sid L. Harle, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

The trial court ’ s certification in this appeal states that “ this criminal case is a plea

- bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal. ” The clerk ’ s record contains a written plea bargain, and the punishment assessed did not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant; therefore, the trial court ’ s certification accurately reflects that the cr iminal case is a plea

- bargain case. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 25.2(a)(2). Rule 25.2(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provides, “ The appeal must be dismissed if a certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record under these rules. ” T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 25.2(d). It is therefore ORDERED that this appeal will be dismissed pursuant to Rule 25.2(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure unless appellant causes an amended trial court certification to be fi led within thirty (30) days from the date of this order showing appellant has the right of appeal. 1 See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 25.2(d); 37.1; see also Daniels v. State

, 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App. C San Antonio 2003, order). All other appellate deadlines are SUSPEN DED pending our resolution of the certification issue.

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

1 We note that the clerk’s record does not contain a notice of appeal, only a “Motion for Extension of Time to File Late Notice of Appeal.”IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 1st day of February, 2018

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Court
# C_2020287EN.01001601.xml

| 31.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 287/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 287/16

---

Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 28 May 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Köln — Germany) — FZ v DER Touristik GmbH

(Case C-153/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Air transport - Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 - Article 12 - Package tour - Long delay of a flight - Passengers’ compensation - Additional compensation - Passenger’s right to a reduction in the price of the journey)

(2020/C 287/23)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Köln

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: FZ

Defendant: DER Touristik GmbH

Operative part of the order

Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91, must be interpreted as not precluding a passenger who has already been compensated under Article 7 of that regulation, from being compensated under a right to a reduction in the price of the journey available to him or her against a tour operator, provided for by the law of the Member State concerned, in so far as that compensation is granted for a loss that is specific to that individual passenger arising from one of the situations provided for in Article 1(1) of that regulation, which it is for the national court to determine.

---

(1)  OJ C 182, 27.5.2019.

---
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 33-80081, 333-33130, 333-47388, 333-70620, 333-98135, 333-108345, 333-152164 and 333-160815) of Silicon Storage Technology, Inc. of
our report dated March 17, 2010 relating to the financial statements, financial statement schedule and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K.



|                                 
|---------------------------------
|/s/    PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
|                                 
|San Jose, California             
|March 17, 2010
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0721

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

COLBY SCOTT DEVLIN,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including August 23, 2023, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 17 2023

07/17/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0721
<PAGE>
                                 EXHIBIT 10.11

                       ASSIGNMENT OF MEMBERSHIP INTEREST

BY THIS ASSIGNMENT OF MEMBERSHIP INTEREST ("Assignment") made and entered into
as of the 29th day of December 2000, AMORTIBANC MANAGEMENT L.C., a Texas Limited
Liability Company.,("Assignor"), and 1st Realty Investments, Inc., a Nevada For
Profit Corporation, ("Assignee"), agree as follows:

         1. Assignment. For the amount of $135.00 evidenced by a note for that
amount from Assignee in favor of Assignor, together with other necessary and
agreed upon consideration as set forth below, the receipt and sufficiency of
which are hereby acknowledged, Assignor hereby irrevocably sells, transfers and
assigns to Assignee all of its membership interest and participation percentage
in Houston Damage Control, L.L.C. Assignee hereby accepts the assignment and
transfer of the Assignors' membership interest in Houston Damage Control,
L.L.C., and agrees to assume any and all obligations and responsibilities
associated with such interest from and after the date of this Assignment and
hold Assignors harmless from any and all liabilities relating thereto.

         2. Further Acts: Additional Documents. Assignors and Assignee shall
perform all such further acts and execute and deliver any and all additional
documents and instruments that may be necessary or desirable to consummate,
evidence or confirm the assignment of the interest described herein.

         3. Counterparts. This Assignment may be executed in counterparts, each
of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which together shall
constitute one and the same instrument.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Assignment has been executed as of the day and
year first above written.

                                        "ASSIGNORS"

                                        AMORTIBANC MANAGEMENT, L.C. a Texas
                                        limited liability company


                                        /s/   Edward W. Dietrich
                                              ------------------
                                        Name  Edward W. Dietrich
                                              ------------------
                                        Title Vice President
                                              --------------

                                        "ASSIGNEE"

                                        1st Realty Investments, Inc. a Nevada
                                        For Profit Corporation

                                        /s/   William Szilagyi
                                              ----------------
                                        Name  William Szilagyi
                                              ----------------
                                        Title President
                                              ---------
# C_2018341EN.01002801.xml

| 24.9.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 341/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.9.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 341/28

---

Action brought on 3 August 2018 — Multifit v EUIPO (Premiere)

(Case T-479/18)

(2018/C 341/40)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Multifit Tiernahrungs GmbH (Krefeld, Germany) (represented by: N. Weber and L. Thiel, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark Premiere — Application No 16 660 383

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 May 2018 in Case R 2365/2017-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
LINDA M. FEHLING,

Appellant,

v.

DAVID K. FEHLING SR.,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-4391

_____________________________/

Opinion filed November 4, 2016.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County.

David Rimmer, Judge.

Linda M. Fehling, pro se, Appellant.

No appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The Court has determined that appellant’s notice of appeal failed to invoke 

its appellate jurisdiction in a timely manner. To be timely, a notice of appeal must 

be filed with the appropriate court within 30 days of rendition of the order on 

appeal. Fla. R. App. P. 9.110(b). Merely mailing the notice or having the notice 

placed in a post office box within the required time period is not sufficient. Raysor 
2

v. Raysor, 706 So. 2d 400, 401 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). Further, the filing of a notice 

of appeal is jurisdictional. Florida courts are required to dismiss an appeal if the 

notice is not filed within the applicable time limit. See Miami-Dade County v. 

Peart, 843 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

B.L. THOMAS, WETHERELL, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., CONCUR.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          13,550
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   13,733
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (6,050)
<INVENTORY>                                      4,398
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                31,461
<PP&E>                                          93,614
<DEPRECIATION>                                (44,435)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 105,745
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           42,827
<BONDS>                                          7,969
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            15
<OTHER-SE>                                      55,980
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   105,745
<SALES>                                        136,120
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               136,120
<CGS>                                           87,320
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  119,415
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,647
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 15,058
<INCOME-TAX>                                     6,329
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              8,729
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,729
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .65
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .65
        

</TABLE>
# C_2021278EN.01000802.xml

| 12.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 278/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 278/8

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 29 April 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht — Germany) — Natumi GmbH v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen

(Case C-815/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Agriculture and fisheries - Organic production and labelling of organic products - Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 - Article 19(2) - Articles 21 and 23 - Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 - Article 27(1) - Article 28 - Annex IX, point 1.3 - Processing of organic food - Non-organic ingredients of agricultural origin - Lithothamnium calcareum alga - Powder obtained by cleaning, grinding and drying the sediment of that alga - Classification - Use in organic foodstuffs for the purpose of calcium enrichment - Authorisation - Conditions)

(2021/C 278/10)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesverwaltungsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Natumi GmbH

Defendant: Land Nordrhein-Westfalen

intervener: Vertreter des Bundesinteresses beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht

Operative part of the judgment

Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 of 5 September 2008 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products with regard to organic production, labelling and control, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1584 of 22 October 2018, must be interpreted as precluding the use of a powder obtained from the cleaned, dried and ground sediment of the alga Lithothamnium calcareum, as a non-organic ingredient of agricultural origin, within the meaning of Article 28 of Regulation No 889/2008, as amended by Implementing Regulation 2018/1584, in the processing of organic foodstuffs, such as rice- and soya-based organic drinks, for the purpose of their enrichment with calcium.

---

(1)  OJ C 77, 9.3.2020.

---
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### Federal Aviation Administration

# AGENCY:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

# ACTION:

Request for public comment.

# SUMMARY:

Notice is being given that the FAA is considering a request from Lee County, Florida to change 24.4 acres of airport property from aeronautical use to non-aeronautical use for commercial development. The surplus property land is no longer required for aviation use. The land has been designated for non-aeronatucal use on the Airport Layout Plan. The County will have land lease agreements with commercial developers that will generate non-aerouatical revenue to be deposited in the airport operation and maintenance fund.

# DATES:

Comments are due on or before January 12, 2024.

# ADDRESSES:

Documents are available for review at the Lee County Port Authority, 11000 Terminal Access Road, Fort Myers, FL 33913, and the FAA Airports District Office, 8427 SouthPark Circle, Suite 524, Orlando, FL 32819. Written comments on the Sponsor's request must be delivered or mailed to: Marisol Elliott, Community Planner, Orlando Airports District Office, 8427 Southark Circle, Suite 524, Orlando, FL 32819.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Marisol Elliott, Community Planner, Orlando Airports District Office, 8427 SouthPark Circle, Suite 524, Orlando, FL 32819, (407) 487-7231.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Section 125 of The Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR-21) requires the FAA to provide an opportunity for public notice and comment prior to the “waiver” or “modification” of a sponsor's Federal obligation to use certain airport land for non-aeronautical purposes.

*Revision Date:*                     August 23, 2022.                

Bartholomew Vernace,

Manager, Orlando Airports District Office, Southern Region.

[FR Doc. 2023-27203 Filed 12-12-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Senior Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as Amended

Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted), James B. Boyd, the Senior Vice
President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of Silicon Storage Technology, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:



In
Witness Whereof, the undersigned has set his hand hereto as of the 15th day of January, 2008.

|/s/JAMES B. BOYDJames B. Boyd Senior Vice President, Finance and
Chief Financial Officer |  | 
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 

A
signed original of this written statement required by Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, has been provided to Silicon Storage
Technology, Inc. and will be retained by Silicon Storage Technology, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

This
certification accompanies the Form 10-K to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by
reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the
Form 10-K), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.

---



QuickLinks
EXHIBIT 32.2


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Itec Environmental Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB/A for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Michael E. Hofmann, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that:

1.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.


/s/ Michael E. Hofmann
----------------------
Michael E. Hofmann
Chief Financial Officer

February 9, 2004
TORRE S. HARRIS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-4970

_____________________________/

Opinion filed May 17, 2017.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Linda F. McCallum, Judge.

Torre S. Harris, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

KELSEY, WINOKUR, and WINSOR, JJ., CONCUR.
ALABAMA COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

December 29, 2023

CR-2023-0145

Jonathan Craig Thomas v. State of Alabama (Appeal from Morgan Circuit Court: 

CC-17-753.60). 

NOTICE 

You are hereby notified that on December 29, 2023, the following action was 

taken in the above-referenced cause by the Court of Criminal Appeals:

Application for Rehearing Overruled.

D. Scott Mitchell, Clerk
22296

#### State v. Sanford

Vacated